Contract Performance Notices: 2026 Changes to the Procurement Act

The Procurement Act 2023 is not only changing how public sector competitions run. It is also raising the bar on what happens after award.

From 2026, suppliers will see more structured performance expectations, and more published information about delivery. That matters because delivery insight helps you qualify opportunities earlier, build stronger win themes, and shape an offer that tackles the buyer’s real pain points.

In this article, we cover what is changing on contract performance and payments, and how bidders can use the new transparency in practical, bid-focused ways.

Overview: What is changing, and when?

From early 2026, the Procurement Act 2023 introduces transparency changes that will be particularly useful for suppliers doing pre-market and pre-bid research.

Contract performance notices

From 1st January, 2026, where a public contract is required to have KPIs in place, contracting authorities must:

• assess performance against those KPIs (at least annually and on termination), and
• publish performance information through contract performance notices.

For bidders, this means more visibility of how contracts are performing during delivery, not just who won the contract in the first place.

KPI requirements for contracts over £5 million

For public contracts with an estimated value of more than £5 million, authorities must set at least three KPIs (unless they consider KPIs are not an appropriate way to assess performance).

This matters because the KPIs are the foundation for performance assessment and reporting.

Payment publication

From 1st April, 2026, contracting authorities must publish specified information about payments over £30,000 made under public contracts. They must generally do so within 30 days of the quarter end in which the payment was made.

For suppliers, this can improve visibility of who is being paid, and patterns of spend that may inform early-stage opportunity analysis.

Please note that implementation of these changes is phased, and can vary depending on the procurement regime and location. It’s worth checking applicability for your target authority.

Section 52: contracts over £5 million must have KPIs

Under Section 52, before entering into a public contract with an estimated value of more than £5 million, a contracting authority must set at least three KPIs for the contract, unless the authority considers that performance could not appropriately be assessed by KPIs.

In practice, this pushes buyers towards clearer, measurable performance expectations during the life of the contract. For suppliers, it should also mean fewer “mystery standards” and a greater focus on evidence, reporting, and outcomes, not just promises.

If you regularly face evaluation questions on KPI reporting and performance management, you may want to cross-check your tender library responses against the new expectations. For example, your standard approach to KPIs and performance measurement tender questions can be a useful starting point, but it should be aligned to more formal KPI setting and assessment.

Section 71: contract performance notices bring delivery into the daylight

Section 71 links directly to those KPIs. Where KPIs are set, contracting authorities must assess supplier performance against them and publish information about that assessment.

The key point for bidders is this: performance data becomes easier to find and easier to use as part of your qualification and solution planning.

That does not mean every contract will suddenly have a public “league table”. It does mean there is a new, more consistent route to understanding how delivery is going, and where a buyer may be unhappy with outcomes, reporting, or remedial action.

Section 70: payment transparency, who is being paid and when

Separately, Section 70 requires contracting authorities to publish specified information about any payment of more than £30,000 made under a public contract, within a defined timeframe.

For suppliers, this can strengthen your pre-bid research. Payment transparency can help you understand which suppliers are receiving spend, how spend is distributed across a category, and where the buyer’s budget is actually flowing.

Used carefully, it supports competitor mapping and supply chain thinking. It can also help you sanity-check assumptions about the incumbent, subcontracting models, or where value sits in the delivery chain.

What this means for bidders, and how to use it

Published information is only useful if it changes what you do. Here are the four areas where we expect performance and payment transparency to have the biggest bid impact.

1) Stronger bid/no-bid decisions, based on evidence not instinct

Better visibility of incumbent performance can materially change your qualification decision.

If performance appears strong, you may need a sharper differentiator and a realistic plan for how you displace a well-performing incumbent. If performance appears weak, you may be looking at a buyer who is actively open to change, provided you can show confidence in mobilisation, governance, and continuous improvement.

A practical way to embed this is to add “incumbent performance signals” to your qualification process. If you already use a structured approach, your bid/no-bid decision matrix is a natural place to include it.

2) Better win themes, grounded in what matters to that buyer

Win themes land best when they reflect the buyer’s lived experience.

If published information shows recurring issues, weak reporting, slow remedial action, or outcomes drifting away from targets, your win themes can speak directly to reliability, transparency, and control. You are not critiquing a competitor. You are demonstrating that your delivery model prevents the same problem from happening again.

This is also where tone matters. Keep it buyer-focused and outcomes-led. “Here is how we will assure performance, evidence it, and respond fast when indicators move” is more compelling than generic statements about quality.

3) A more targeted offer, not just a stronger story

Performance transparency can shape your solution in concrete ways, including:

• mobilisation approach and early service stabilisation
• governance structure, meeting cadence, and escalation routes
• reporting packs and evidence trails
• risk management, including triggers and mitigations
• KPI definitions, baselines, and how you avoid data disputes

If you want to pressure-test your approach to contract management and performance reporting content, it is worth aligning it with your wider contract delivery narrative. Many suppliers already have good material across contract governance, but it is not always connected to how the buyer will measure success.

4) Smarter pre-market research, combining performance and payment signals

Payment publication and performance notices complement each other.

Performance information can show what is working and what is not. Payment information can help show who is being paid, and where spend is concentrated.

Together, they can improve the quality of your pre-bid work, including:

• competitor mapping and likely delivery partners
• identifying specialist capability gaps in the current model
• spotting where the buyer is investing, and where it is not
• validating your assumptions before you commit bid time

This is most powerful when it becomes part of your standard pre-bid routine, alongside market engagement, prior award research, and your internal pipeline intelligence.

A practical workflow: turning transparency into bid advantage

If you want a simple way to operationalise this, use the steps below as a repeatable workflow.

Step 1: gather the signals early

Build a short research pack before you commit serious bid effort. Combine your usual research with any published performance and payment information relevant to the authority and category.

If you need a structure for your wider pre-bid research, you can align this with your existing pre-bid approach, including pre-bid steps and opportunity qualification.

Step 2: translate signals into decisions

Avoid collecting information that never changes your behaviour. Decide what each signal means for:

• bid/no-bid score
• win probability and confidence level
• partner strategy
• the offer, including mobilisation and governance

Step 3: shape your solution and your bid narrative

Use what you found to improve the bid in ways the evaluator can see, such as:

• clearer KPI approach with defined evidence and reporting
• strong mobilisation plan that reduces early delivery risk
• governance model that surfaces issues early, with fast escalation
• credible continuous improvement process

Step 4: prepare bid questions that de-risk delivery

Use clarifications and engagement questions to remove ambiguity, especially on:

• KPI definitions, baselines, and data sources
• reporting format and frequency
• governance expectations and service credits, if applicable
• how performance will be assessed, moderated, and published

What buyers should be doing now, and why it matters to suppliers

Buyers will be under pressure to get KPI design and contract management processes right. Where KPIs are weak, or assessment and publication workflows are inconsistent, the authority risks increased scrutiny and supplier challenge.

For suppliers, that creates both risk and opportunity:

• risk, because poorly designed KPIs can create delivery disputes
• opportunity, because bidders who show a clear KPI and reporting method will reduce perceived risk for the evaluator

In other words, performance transparency increases the value of a well-developed contract management approach within your tender response.

How to respond to the changes

Contract performance notices and payment transparency will not win a tender by themselves. What they can do is raise the quality of your decisions and your offer.

If you want support using these changes in live pursuits, Thornton & Lowe can help you:

• strengthen qualification and bid/no-bid decision making
• translate performance signals into credible win themes
• build a KPI and contract management approach that evaluators trust
• improve governance, mobilisation, and performance reporting sections in bids